Mathew takes Isaiah Chapter 7 way out of context

[sincerly]

It doesn't say what the sign is

Hi Disciple, perhaps you overlooked Isa.7:14. "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel". Immanuel interpreted means "GOD with us".
And that is what the Angel(Gabriel)informed Joseph(Matt.1:18-25) concerning and not to be concerned that Mary was pregnant. Joseph was obedient to the vision.

 

[Desert Snake]

Hi Disciple, perhaps you overlooked Isa.7:14. "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel". Immanuel interpreted means "GOD with us".
And that is what the Angel(Gabriel)informed Joseph concerning and not to be concerned that Mary was pregnant. Joseph was obedient to the vision.

..Yes, I agree with you, that does seem to be the scriptural context. I mentioned the star of Bethlehem as speculative to the question in the OP

 

[Shermana]

Hi Disciple, perhaps you overlooked Isa.7:14. "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel". Immanuel interpreted means "GOD with us".
And that is what the Angel(Gabriel)informed Joseph(Matt.1:18-25) concerning and not to be concerned that Mary was pregnant. Joseph was obedient to the vision.

So you believe it was a double prophecy or do you believe that prophecy only applies to Jesus and not to the child born in the next chapter?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Are you serious? I don't study Biblical commentary all the time, I was talking about original sin, which I do have Rabbinical reference to

Good grief.

 

[CG Didymus]

Good grief.

Good Morning Jayhawker Soule Every now and then there seems to be some kind of communication break down. Now you've been doing this since 2004 and over 20,000 posts. I know it's easier to find points where we all disagree than to find the things we all have in common. You coming from Judaism must get it from all sides. It was probably in this thread somewhere that I mentioned that some Christians think they know the Hebrew Scriptures better than you and the Rabbi's. Thanks for persevering and putting up with all of us. Because I was raised Catholic and coerced into being born-again by the Fundies, I assumed, without researching it, that Judaism was wrong. I'm getting a taste of what you must be going through just by posing these questions that challenge some basic doctrines and beliefs of Christianity. Because I was of my Christian upbringing, I assumed God was a Trinity. I assumed we were born with original sin and needed a savior. I assumed Jesus was born of a virgin and resurrected from the dead. Now I'm not so sure. I believe there is enough ambiguity in all religions to allow everyone to go in a thousand different directions and think they are still right and going on the one true path of God. Thanks again for holding your ground. Judaism is the foundation for so many of our beliefs, yet so many of us don't know anything about it.

 

[Desert Snake]

Good Morning Jayhawker Soule Every now and then there seems to be some kind of communication break down. Now you've been doing this since 2004 and over 20,000 posts. I know it's easier to find points where we all disagree than to find the things we all have in common. You coming from Judaism must get it from all sides. It was probably in this thread somewhere that I mentioned that some Christians think they know the Hebrew Scriptures better than you and the Rabbi's. Thanks for persevering and putting up with all of us. Because I was raised Catholic and coerced into being born-again by the Fundies, I assumed, without researching it, that Judaism was wrong. I'm getting a taste of what you must be going through just by posing these questions that challenge some basic doctrines and beliefs of Christianity. Because I was of my Christian upbringing, I assumed God was a Trinity. I assumed we were born with original sin and needed a savior. I assumed Jesus was born of a virgin and resurrected from the dead. Now I'm not so sure. I believe there is enough ambiguity in all religions to allow everyone to go in a thousand different directions and think they are still right and going on the one true path of God. Thanks again for holding your ground. Judaism is the foundation for so many of our beliefs, yet so many of us don't know anything about it.

Christian concept= original sin
Judaism concept= inclination to sin
you do realize that that leaves my original question of whether it is possible for someone to be sinless, unanswered, ....right?

 

[CG Didymus]

Hey Disciple, if sin is defined as falling short of the mark, then we all fall short. Do we need a savior? Is Jesus the only way? Was he virgin born? Can we follow God's commandments in the Torah and strive toward righteousness? Who knows? What do you think? And, what are you doing to live a spiritual life?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

you do realize that that leaves my original question of whether it is possible for someone to be sinless, unanswered, ....right?

Given ...

Original sin concept comes from Genesis

No, it comes from a Christian interpretation of Genesis.

so according to Judaism it is possible for one to be without sin?

... your original question could best be restated as:

Does your statement that original sin is a Christian interpretation of Genesis mean that according to Judaism it is possible for one to be without sin?​

And the answer is:

No, it does not mean any such thing nor was their any intelligent basis for you to infer or suggest that it did.​

 

[Desert Snake]

And the answer is:

No, it does not mean any such thing nor was their any intelligent basis for you to infer or suggest that it did.
​

We must be using a different measure of intelligence, that is the first question that comes up when analyzing the concept of original sin

Like I said, if you don't want to answer the question, you don't have to, but this obfuscation is really making your argument look poor

 

[Desert Snake]

Hey Disciple, if sin is defined as falling short of the mark, then we all fall short.

According to Christian doctrine, yes

Do we need a savior?

perhaps

Is Jesus the only way?
perhaps

Was he virgin born?

perhaps
Can we follow God's commandments in the Torah and strive toward righteousness?

What do you think? I think so, but that's just my opinion
Who knows? What do you think? And, what are you doing to live a spiritual life?

I'm not sure how you are defining the last question

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by sincerly
Hi Disciple, perhaps you overlooked Isa.7:14. "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel". Immanuel interpreted means "GOD with us".
And that is what the Angel(Gabriel)informed Joseph(Matt.1:18-25) concerning and not to be concerned that Mary was pregnant. Joseph was obedient to the vision.

So you believe it was a double prophecy or do you believe that prophecy only applies to Jesus and not to the child born in the next chapter?

Hi Shermana, It is scripturally stated to refer to Jesus' birth. I have my doubts as to the "prophetess" of the next chapter being a "virgin" or that she was the "sign" intended by GOD.
However, double applications are a reality.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It is scripturally stated to refer to Jesus' birth.

That's preposterous.

 

[CG Didymus]

Hey Disciple, since you answered most of the questions with a "perhaps," the last question would be what religious and spiritual truths do you find that work or make sense to you? Have you settled in on any or are more in a searching for truth mode?
I thought of another thing that relates to being sinful or sinless and that is from the Christian TV show The Way of the Master. The hosts of the show go out on the street and talk to people and ask them if they think they are "good" people. Most say that they are, but then the hosts ask them about following the 10 commandments and all of them are led to the point where they have to admit that they fall way short of God's standard. So more out of ignorance, I think some people can think they are "sinless" but they aren't judging themselves by the Christian standard. Although I question Christianity, I can feel the emptiness when I do wrong and even think wrong. And most of the moral standards I'm judging my own behavior with are from the Judeo/Christian tradition. I don't have a problem with trying to be a better more spiritual person. My problem is with the possibility that people embellished the story to get us to believe. Which is a lie isn't it? That's why I want Christians to be honest and read Isaiah chapter 7 and tell me how, when taken in context, they get a messiah being born from a virgin 700 years later?

 

[Desert Snake]

Hey Disciple, since you answered most of the questions with a "perhaps," the last question would be what religious and spiritual truths do you find that work or make sense to you? Have you settled in on any or are more in a searching for truth mode?
I thought of another thing that relates to being sinful or sinless and that is from the Christian TV show The Way of the Master. The hosts of the show go out on the street and talk to people and ask them if they think they are "good" people. Most say that they are, but then the hosts ask them about following the 10 commandments and all of them are led to the point where they have to admit that they fall way short of God's standard. So more out of ignorance, I think some people can think they are "sinless" but they aren't judging themselves by the Christian standard.

That wasn't my question, though, my question was whether it was actually possible for someone to be sinless according to Judaism

Although I question Christianity, I can feel the emptiness when I do wrong and even think wrong. And most of the moral standards I'm judging my own behavior with are from the Judeo/Christian tradition. I don't have a problem with trying to be a better more spiritual person.

If you question Christianity then why not question the morality it teaches?
My problem is with the possibility that people embellished the story to get us to believe.

That being the case, then you can follow the teachings of Jesus, exclusively, keep in mind that that means disregarding all extra text, otherwise you are merely picking & choosing what scripture to follow....that of course is your prerogative, but it is necessarily everyone elses prerogative to do the same thing...which brings us to the question of why you are questioning anyone beliefs

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by sincerly
It is scripturally stated to refer to Jesus' birth.

That's preposterous.

Yes, scripturally based. Matt.1:18-23, "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Then Joseph her husband, being a just [man], and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. "

OT Prophecy fulfilled.
Remember that GOD said to Abraham, (Gen.18:14; and Ps.115:3; Jer.32:17) "Is any thing too hard for the Lord?"
"Preposterous"? Not with GOD.

 

[CG Didymus]

Originally Posted by sincerly
It is scripturally stated to refer to Jesus' birth.
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. "
"Preposterous"? Not with GOD.

Is that all chapter 7 says about this child? If it is a prophecy about the coming messiah shouldn't the rest of the chapter tell us more about what is to happen? Of course it doesn't. The main point is that the boy reaches a certain age and the enemies of King Ahaz are done away with. This boy fulfills the contextual sign by getting older. Whether he was born of a young woman or a virgin isn't the point. The messiah fulfills the sign by being born of a virgin but what about the rest of the story in chapter 7? It doesn't matter? Isn't that "mining" "cherry-picking" and ripping verses out of context? Not there is anything wrong with that. Islam, The Baha'i Faith and others do it to the Christian New Testament. So to be fair, I guess that is alright, because they say an angel, God, or the Holy Spirit told them the new, better, and real interpretation.
Naturally, any good Christian would say, "No, that's different. You can't add or subtract from the New Testament." But, isn't that what Christianity did to Judaism? They added and subtracted from the Hebrew Scriptures, dropped what they couldn't use, and made a new religion.
I like how you think and act, so I'm not trying to get you to change what you believe, just somehow, to understand where I'm coming from. Which, unfortunately, is to bash literal Christianity for not respecting other religions and seeing their point of view. I know you see it more like I'm seeking and questioning, but sometimes I do slide into that bashing mode. Sorry, I'll try to understand and respect your religious beliefs too. Thanks, Sincerly have a great Christmas.

 

[Desert Snake]

Naturally, any good Christian would say, "No, that's different. You can't add or subtract from the New Testament."

Huh? Have you read the forums on RF?..people do that all the time...it's to be expected whenever scriptural arguments reference the NT

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Yes, scripturally based. Matt.1:18-23, ...

Let me be clear: I have little doubt the the author of gMt had Isaiah in mind when he fabricated his virgin birth narrative, but to believe that Isaiah was prophesying Jesus is dumb as rocks - so foolish, in fact, that apologists resort to babbling about "double fulfillment" in an effort to make it appear somewhat less preposterous.

 

[CG Didymus]

Let me be clear: I have little doubt the the author of gMt had Isaiah in mind when he fabricated his virgin birth narrative, but to believe that Isaiah was prophesying Jesus is dumb as rocks - so foolish, in fact, that apologists resort to babbling about "double fulfillment" in an effort to make it appear somewhat less preposterous.

I have no problem believing that Zoroastrianism, Mithraism and other mystery religions influenced early Christians. If I were a Greek and Paul came to town and told me about a God/man who rose from the dead and was born of a human virgin and of God's Holy Spirit I'd say, "Eh, what else is new?" Then if he said that all I have to do is believe to be guaranteed eternal life and that I didn't need to get circumcised. I didn't need to follow kosher laws. I didn't need to observe the Sabbath. I'd say, "Oh, well now you're talking. So I don't have to become Jewish first to follow this new Jewish cult?" He say that all I had to do is have faith and get baptized. Then I'd say, "Show me to the swimming hole." On the way I'd ask, "Oh, do you have any written proof?" He'd say yes, "My letters, but they don't mention that virgin born thing. You'll have to wait a few decades for the gospels to be written to get that story." By chance, or miracle Mathew and Luke happen by. They say, "We have proof." They pop open Isaiah and show me Isaiah 7:14 in the Septuagint. I say, "Oh, well there is absolute proof. Isaiah was hundreds of years ago and right there he says a virgin will give birth. I believe!" They close the book or roll up the scroll, whichever. Then I ask, "What did it say on the next page?" They say, "Never mind that but over here where it says this thing about the bright and morning star and over here where it says the Prince and King of Tyre, that's really the devil, God's enemy. He wants to get you and destroy you, so you better hurray and get baptized." I look around and ask, "Where is he?" "He's invisible." I ask, "Then how do you know he's real?" "Because you know like Zoroaster said that there was a good God and a bad god? It's like that." "Oh, right I remember, kind of like Hades and Zeus?" "Yes, exactly. But our stories aren't myth."
After all of that, whew, a double fulfillment is the least of my worries. But now that you mention it, who was the first virgin?

 

[sincerly]

Is that all chapter 7 says about this child? If it is a prophecy about the coming messiah shouldn't the rest of the chapter tell us more about what is to happen? Of course it doesn't.

Hi CG D, Since we are scripturally 6000 years beyond the Creation narrative of Genesis, One would have liked for the Author to have given more details. For example, Gen.3:15 is a single verse(Prophecy) and relates to this topic. "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."
There is still nine verses remaining in that chapter yet not one more for any details of that Prophecy.
At the beginning of HIS ministry to the people, on the Sabbath, Jesus went into the synagogue and read from Isa.61:1-half of verse 2 and stopped there (Luke 4:16-21). "And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, ""The Spirit of the Lord [is] upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. ""
And he closed the book, and he gave [it] again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears."
It was prophesied what the Messiah was sent to do and Jesus was beginning to Do those activities prophecied. Some of the rest of that Chapter is still to be fulfilled.

As Jesus told those unbelievers of HIS day.(John 5:45-47), "Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is [one] that accuseth you, [even] Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? "

Paul put it thusly. (1Cor.10:6,11), "Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted......Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. "

Also, Jesus to unbelieving Thomas, (John 20:28-29), "And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed".

I like how you think and act, so I'm not trying to get you to change what you believe, just somehow, to understand where I'm coming from. Which, unfortunately, is to bash literal Christianity for not respecting other religions and seeing their point of view. I know you see it more like I'm seeking and questioning, but sometimes I do slide into that bashing mode. Sorry, I'll try to understand and respect your religious beliefs too. Thanks, Sincerly have a great Christmas.

CG D, this is scriptural debate and therefore, in that understanding I say this, I Do understand where you are in seeking for Truth. We all have a certain amount of "Thomas" in us. However, Thomas is the last of the human race that will actually physically be able to place one's finger in those wounds.
The Scriptural evidence is there for ALL to assess and make their choice to Believe or deny. The Choice one makes in one's life time is the one that counts. Therefore, choose wisely.
For a period of over a year, like you, I did alot of comparing beliefs with Scriptural "Thus saith the Lord". I thing I didn't do very much of was accepting of mens ideas/opinions as a valid reason for validating a belief. Since false Ideas/opinions can not be in harmony with the scriptural Truths.